Most research is universal basic income for PhDs with no really benefit. Even worse, most research can’t be reproduced anymore.
We need to identify the highest quality research projects and fund those. After being associated with academia and research, the whining and crying of random PhDs are all in their own self interest but not in OUR collective self interest. Most research doesn’t deserve funding.
It's not hyped. It's the most effective way I've seen the people around me lose weight. Some of them have lost a tremendous amount of weight very quickly.
But a know a couple of them that went off it and the weight came back pretty quickly. It really is just a suppression of hunger, nothing more than that.
> It really is just a suppression of hunger, nothing more than that.
It is actually a lot more than that. Many people on Ozempic report better impulse control (food or otherwise). Many stop or significantly reduce alcohol intake. It seems that gut hormones are linked to reward pathways in the brain.
It can be hyped because jabs bring immediate results. And it can be prescribed by almost every doctor so number of people who can report is big, and therefore visible results can be further disseminated (hyped).
But… treatment is working.
Question is at what cost.
If something is too good to be true, one has to ask what is behind it. But perhaps it is a similar situation to when antibiotics were invented.
The human body is stupid and makes a lot of mistakes. It's very obvious to me that our bodies and minds were not built for their current environment.
When someone's brain has a bug in which is has seizures, we do not ask them "what's behind" their epilepsy medication. No, we understand their brain has a problem that should be fixed. There is no ulterior perspective, some secret hidden ability they might possess. It's just bad.
But when it comes to food, we forget this is how we view things. In it's place comes moralizing.
every commit in every open source project should now go through an AI to see if it can detect anything nefarious. I'm sure there are ways to fool it but it makes it a lot easier for bad actors to get caught.
It’s a combination of factors: you must reduce both blue light and intensity of light to avoid suppressing melatonin. Just reducing blue light might help a little, but it still suppresses melatonin. Melatonin levels and circadian phase shifts scale with total irradiance even if blue-depleted; basically, dimming the lights is really effective.
That’s why our products focus on both intensity and color change (but we lead with blue light reduction since it’s easier to grasp).
Also, if you look at our specs, you’ll see that we don’t use pure amber or red light; we use very low-blue white light with high color rendering. We have yet to do the study on this, but you can read surprisingly well with our lighting at a very low intensity (enough to make your mom angry that you are hurting your eyes), whereas with lower CRI sources, you would have to make them brighter to achieve the same visual acuity.
There is some emerging research that IR may play a role in melatonin production locally in cells, which is why we added it to the bulb. Early days for this scientifically, but Scott Zimmerman and associated researchers suggest wideband IR may be effective, even if it’s only 20-30% of the visible intensity.
I’m tired of living in a world where everything is financially engineered and those sociopathic money-hungry deviants use every trick in the book to turn all of us into life long subscribers.
Seems like someone motivated could make an open source alternative to ESO’s lineup and make it impossible for them to make a monopoly in that niche. I wonder if you put out a call to all volunteer fire departments, if they have enough devs collectively to oust the aholes.
There is a rather infamous old tactic to fight back against this. When Brown v Board of Education made segregation illegal in public schooling, many white families started private academies, avoiding regulations by stripping everything they could from the public systems and transplanting them into private ones. Obviously heinous, but perhaps a path forward here.
People decry extreme, scorched-earth approaches, except it seems to work mighty well for conservatives. You're just not allowed to do it if you're "woke", I guess. (Who says? Do it anyway.)
This is what happens when highly confident uneducated people read slop from other uneducated people with an agenda (Twitter, Burry et al) and then regurgitate more slop.
There is no circular funding. There’s certainly circular speculation that is driving up the prices but the revenues are all accounted.
The DSO change is meaningless if you understand accounting.
The inventory building up is the cost of materials and incomplete inventory. It’s not chips sitting around waiting to be deployed.
> holding ~120 days of inventory seems like a huge capital drag to me.
Yeah I guess this guy who knows nothing about running a business like Nvidia is allowed to make confident statements like this despite no education or experience.
This article is garbage and he wasted his 48 hrs investigating the same things I read in another worthless tweet several weeks ago.
Are partially processed wafers on Nvidia's balance sheet or TSMC's? Or are you saying Nvidia is holding sawn die in inventory? Confused as to what state the product might be in for it to make sense to hold for 4 months when supposedly you can sell everything you make.
They are on nvidias balance sheet. You also don’t sell freshly baked chips the way you do cookies. Just because they are hot out of the oven doesn’t mean you sell it right away.
What specific impact do you think that would have on this study? Do you think vaccines prior to Nov-2021 were safe and they were unsafe after? Do you think short term results, captured after Nov-2021 are more relevant than inclusive results prior?
The target trial emulation specifies "individuals deceased or vaccinated during the 6 month grace period between the index date and the effective start of follow-up" as an exclusion criteria
They define unvaccinated as anyone in the study who didn't get their first dose by Nov 2021. That feels like a pretty tight window to me. I don't think they checked to see if those "unvaccinated" people got vaccinated during the 4 year followup, especially given the mandates that forced people to get them.
It's the full vaccination rate; as of Dec 1 2021 it was 69.89%. A month later (i.e. those Nov folks are getting their second dose) it's 74%; latest number on the chart is 78.44%.
How would they calculate 4 year all-cause mortality on people who got vaccinated after Nov 2021? In case you haven't looked at a calendar recently, it's December 2025 now.
Maybe you were a special group? I know some government workers who interacted with the public regularly got it early. Most people I know started getting it around March or April 2021.
If you "know" that a study whose title you are predisposed to disagree with has "BS" in it, something tells me no amount of scientific evidence is going to persuade you.
I bought 64 GB DDR4 RAM for $189 in 2022. The exact same memory is now almost $600 on Amazon. How can this not impact PC sales and the sale of other electronics?
This is good.
Most research is universal basic income for PhDs with no really benefit. Even worse, most research can’t be reproduced anymore.
We need to identify the highest quality research projects and fund those. After being associated with academia and research, the whining and crying of random PhDs are all in their own self interest but not in OUR collective self interest. Most research doesn’t deserve funding.
reply